MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810555606 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2018-2355

Abstract 2355: Penile cancer in vitro models useful for the identification of targeted therapies

2018· article· en· W2810555606 on OpenAlexaff
Hellen Kuasne, Mateus Camargo Barros‐Filho, Juan José Augusto Moyano Muñoz, Fábio Albuquerque Marchi, Cristovam Scapulatempo‐Neto, Eliney Ferreira Faria, Gustavo Cardoso Guimarães, Ademar Lopes, Julia Mello, Maria Aparecida Custódio Domingues, Sébastien Carreno, Sílvia Regina Rogatto

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancer researchBiologyPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayCancerCisplatinMolecular biologyGeneticsApoptosisChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Penile carcinoma (PeCa) is a frequent disease in poor and developing countries showing high morbidity. Despite the recent progress in the molecular research of PeCa, the lack of well-characterized in vitro models precludes new advances in the knowledge of cellular processes and in preclinical tests for anticancer drugs' efficacy. Material and Methods: Twenty PeCa were surgically removed, dissected and cultured in vitro (2D and 3D environment) using 3 KSFM: 1 DMEM/F12. We established five penile cancer cell cultures in vitro (passage 20), which were characterized by genomic (CytoScan HD - Affymetrix), translatomic (Clariom D Array - Affymetrix), epigenomic (Infinium Methylation EPIC BeadChip - Illumina) and proteomic profiles (Reverse phase protein array - RPPA). Chemosensitivity assay using cisplatin and EGFR inhibitors (Erbitux and Tarceva) was performed by MTT test. Results: Two cell cultures presented typical epithelial cell morphology and epithelial markers expression such as cytokeratin and EpCAM and three were cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs). These cell cultures presented cancer behavior features including anchorage-independent growth, invasive potential, and capability to form tumor in nude mice. The genomic analysis revealed high similarity between the primary tumor and its derived cell culture. Transcriptomic and proteomic analysis revealed that the most relevant differentially expressed genes and proteins are components of key oncogenic pathways (MMPs, EGFR, STAT3, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR), supporting our previous data using PeCa fresh tissues. We also identified a set of genes potentially regulated by epigenetic modifications. A chemosensitivity investigation suggested that these cells are sensitive to cisplatin, a chemotherapy agent commonly used in advanced PeCa. One cell culture with EGFR overexpression was sensitive to anti-EGFR drugs (Tarceva and Erbitux). Conclusion: In general, PeCa cell cultures recapitulated cancer behavior in vitro and showed the same dysregulated pathways than their corresponding primary tumors. These cells proved to be reliable in vitro models to dissect mechanisms promoting penile carcinogenesis and to test new targeted therapies. Our results support recent studies in which patients with advanced PeCa expressing EGFR can benefit from the treatment with EGFR-targeted therapies. Citation Format: Hellen Kuasne, Mateus Barros-Filho, Juan Muñoz, Fabio Marchi, Cristovam Scapulatempo-Neto, Eliney Faria, Gustavo Guimarães, Ademar Lopes, Julia Mello, Maria Domingues, Sebastien Carréno, Silvia Rogatto. Penile cancer in vitro models useful for the identification of targeted therapies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2355.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207